Mr. Weicker At Midpoint

In the first year, he would tackle a billion-dollar budget deficit by persuading the Legislature to approve a progressive income tax. Reforming Connecticut's antiquated revenue system that way would take courage, and Mr. Weicker would be known as the gutsiest governor in the nation.

In the second year, the attention would be on economic revival -- on having the state act as a catalyst for the preservation and expansion of jobs. Mr. Weicker would be known as the governor who made Connecticut competitive again.

In year three, he would concentrate on helping cities and higher education on a grand enough scale to attract national notice. By then, the Weicker story would be well on its way to becoming a legend.

In the final year of his term, Mr. Weicker would call for a tax cut. Yes, a tax cut. By then, Connecticut's economy would be revived and the man who helped make it happen would be poised for re-election, or for national office.

The first year of this dream scenario actually came to life. Tax reform was born.

The scenario for year two also materialized in the legislation that provided economic stimuli. But the state continued to lose jobs. The worst recession in Connecticut since the Depression had tremendous staying power. Help from state government may have broken the free fall, but it didn't bring about revival.

So the slope remains slippery on the eve of year three. The Weicker administration is preparing the next budget and no doubt would like to find additional money for cities and higher education.

Indeed, the word from Mr. Weicker last week was "cut." A $29 million budget shortfall is being projected for the fiscal year that ends June 30. Taxpayers paid "a hell of a price to get us out of the red and into the black and I can assure you I'm going to keep us there," vowed the governor.

Mr. Weicker is right in looking for cuts, not tax hikes, to balance the budget. Although it would be nice to have more money to

spend on the urban and education agendas, the extra dollars must be generated from economic revival. Asking people to pay more taxes after a massive tax hike last year and another such hike in the final year of Gov. William A. O'Neill's term would be politically suicidal and economically self-defeating.

Even those who favor repairing the state income tax should understand that the goal must be to make the system as fair as possible, not to raise more money. In their election campaigns, most candidates who supported repair didn't say they were for a tax increase.

Mr. Weicker has been quiet on the issue of making the income tax more progressive. The State Tax Review Commission, which has been studying the new tax structure for more than a year, is not recommending repair. The commission believes there is sufficient progressivity in the tax. What's needed most, according to this group, is more tax breaks for job stimulation.

Although the state tax system is far more equitable than it was before reform, there is still room for making it even fairer -- for making people in the highest income groups pay taxes proportionate to their wealth.

Repair will no doubt surface in the Legislature next year. If repair passes, Mr. Weicker probably will not stand in the way, provided the measure is revenue neutral.

But failure of repair will not hurt the state as much as failure to search for more ways to revive the anemic economy. Toward that end, House Republican leader Edward C. Krawiecki Jr. has called on Mr. Weicker to convene an economic summit of leaders from the legislative branch and the executive branch. Mr. Krawiecki would rather not wait until Jan. 6, when the Legislature convenes, to begin "discussions on a comprehensive, cooperative economic-recovery program."

A legislative-executive summit could help avoid gridlock next year. But participants would have to leave their egos at the door and enter into discussions in a spirit of bipartisanship.

Mr. Krawiecki didn't set a good example when he called for a summit and also blasted Mr. Weicker "for spending money faster than any human being I've seen in my life." The time is past for such hyperbole.

The midpoint of the four-year dream scenario is approaching. We must try to continue searching for effective economic stimuli and pray for strong signs of economic recovery. Otherwise, there will be no meaningful help for cities and higher education. There will be no tax cuts in the fourth year. And there may be no re-election for Mr. Weicker